In recent years, a number of new telephone service features have been provided by an Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN). The AIN evolved out of a need to increase the capabilities of the telephone network architecture in order to meet the growing needs of telephone customers or users. Additionally, as the number of people who rely on the Internet for communication increases, so does the demand for the electronic transfer of data.
Referring now to FIG. 1, it is seen that an AIN-based network arrangement is provided within and/or in conjunction with a wire line telephone system LATA (Local Access and Transport Area) 101 that defines a calling service area. Note that a similar arrangement is also provided with and/or in conjunction with a wireless telephone system. The LATA 101 includes stations (i.e. telephone lines and telephone equipment at the ends thereof) 103 and corresponding service switching points (SSPs) 105 (i.e., end offices or central offices). The SSPs 105 are each programmable switches which: recognize AIN-type calls; launch queries to service control points (SCPs) 107 (only one being shown in FIG. 1); and receive commands and data from SCPs 107 to further process and route AIN-type calls. A signal transfer point (STP) 109 may be employed to route signals between the SSPs 105, the SCPs 107, and other network elements. When one of the SSPs 105 is triggered by an AIN-type call, the triggered SSP 105 formulates an AIN service request and responds to call processing instructions from the network element in which the AIN service logic resides, typically at an SCP 107.
One type of event that may be arranged to set off an AIN trigger in an SSP 105 or the like is a call from a calling party that is unable to or refuses to provide an identification of itself to a called party that requires such an identification. Such identification is typically a name of the calling party in addition to a telephone number thereof. More particularly, the called party may wish to have the name identification of the calling party prior to determining whether to answer the call, and may in fact subscribe to a service that presents such name identification to the called party. Such a name identification service may of course be provided as a non-AIN service.
Inasmuch as the called party may wish to have the name identification of the calling party, the calling party may wish to refuse to provide the name identification, or such name identification may not be available for technical reasons. In particular, the name identification may be unavailable based on network equipment and protocols, especially between networks, based on locale, or based on the calling party affirmatively blocking such identification. Such a blocking service may be provided to the calling party as an AIN or non-AIN service.
In the circumstance where the name identification is not presented to the calling party, such called party may wish to have the call terminated prior to being connected thereto, and may in fact subscribe to such a ‘privacy’ service to screen such calls, where the privacy service may be AIN- or non-AIN-based. In such a case, the called party is never made aware that the call was attempted inasmuch as the privacy service intercepts the call prior to the call being put through. Similarly, in such circumstance, such called party may wish to be connected to the call only if the calling party is given an opportunity to provide the identification, and may in fact subscribe to such a modified privacy service to screen such calls, where the modified privacy service also may be AIN- or non-AIN-based. In such a case, the called party may be made aware that the call is attempted prior to the call being put through, but is not connected to the call until the called party affirmatively chooses such course of action, perhaps based on whether the calling party provides the identification and on whether the identification is acceptable to the called party.
A problem arises in connection with the privacy or modified-privacy (hereinafter ‘privacy’) service in that the called party may wish to receive calls from certain calling parties without any screening. For example, such certain calling parties may be a friend or relative of the called party, a doctor, a hospital, etc. In the case where the call is terminated prior to being connected if the name identification is not presented, it may be that the called party knows that it wants to receive calls from a certain calling party based on a telephone number thereof, but that the corresponding name identification is blocked or otherwise cannot be presented. In such a situation, despite wanting to receive calls from the calling party, such calls will be blocked based on the failure to present the identification.
Similarly, in the case where the call is terminated only after the calling party fails to given a name identification after being provided with an opportunity to do so, it likewise may be that the called party knows that it wants to receive calls from a certain calling party based on a telephone number thereof, and therefore does not need for the calling party to be bothered with providing the corresponding identification if blocked or otherwise not presented. In such a situation, despite wanting to receive calls from the calling party without the aforementioned bother, such calling party nevertheless will have to suffer the bother based on the failure to present the identification.
Accordingly, a need exists for a method and mechanism by which the called party subscribing to the privacy service can identify privileged calling parties that are not required to be screened by the privacy service. More particularly, a need exists for such a method and mechanism by which the calling party can set forth telephone numbers of such privileged calling parties. Thus, when a privileged calling party calls a called party subscribing to a privacy service, the privileged calling party is not screened by the privacy service and the call is connected to the called party without any bother to the calling party.